It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
The metric system is used widely for scientific purposes but there are some exceptions, especially at large and small scales, such as the parsec. It has been adopted for everyday life by most nations through a process called metrication. As of 2006, 95% of the world's population live in metricated countries, although non-metric units are still used for some purposes in some countries. The holdouts to full metrication are the United States and, to a lesser degree, the United Kingdom, where there is public attachment to the traditional units.
Originally posted by a1ex
Any Idea When the world will at least agree on something and adopt the metric system?
For practical purposes that may be the best thing. Adopt them both and wait and see which measurements win out in the long run. For some reason Americans just love their "English" measurements. I have long since used both systems but it would be difficult for me to for instance build a house using metric. I would spend my day figuring rather than building! And I know that most builders feel the same. There are those who do work with both because we have many products and machines from abroad but they learned it out of necessity.
By Iori
Personally I'm all for officially declaring both Imperial and Metric as the official measuring
Originally posted by stumason
we use both here in the UK. for food, officially it has to be metric, but sellers can label in Imperial as well.
There are some ongoing efforts to abandon the DPI in favor of giving the inter-dot spacing in micrometres (µm). This is however hindered by leading companies located in the USA[citation needed], one of the few remaining countries to not use the metric system exclusively. A resolution of 72 dpi for example equals an inter-dot spacing of about 350 µm, 96 dpi → 265 µm, 160 dpi → 160 µm, 300 dpi → 85 µm, 4000 dpi → 6.4 µm. Going the other way, 1 µm → 25400 dpi, 30 µm → 850 dpi, 200 µm → 127 dpi. Note that 25400 = 1 dpi·µm, so dividing 25400 by a measurement in one of these units gives the measurement in the other unit.
Some have also proposed using dpcm (dots per centimetre).
Originally posted by a1ex
Any know if the Metric measurement of monitor resolution is realy being indered by leading companies located in the USA?
Originally posted by stumason
Originally posted by a1ex
Any know if the Metric measurement of monitor resolution is really being indered by leading companies located in the USA?
Isn't monitor resolution defined by the the amount of pixels on the actual screen? So 1280 x 1024 is the amount of pixels in the image and the pixels being defined by the amount of actual lines in the screen itself?
Flyersfan, maybe they should just do both sets concurrently until "old farts" such as yourself "make way"? hehe, only messing
As I said though, the conversion is easy enough to remember and do in your head....
Originally posted by stumason
Flyersfan, maybe they should just do both sets concurrently until "old farts" such as yourself "make way"?
Originally posted by FlyersFan
That damn foreign metric junk is on EVERYTHING I buy.
I'm an American, damnit, and we use our own measurements
for everyday stuff. Oh sure .. the metric stuff is on everything
but I am too old to 'switch' ...
Not using metric is part of our culture.
Leave our American culture alone!
Originally posted by apc
I see a pattern... Does anyone else see it?